Bernard Haitink dies

[M. Yaskovsky]

We still have Herbert Blomstedt...

[Alan Howe]

We do indeed. And he's a treasure, to be sure.

[Ilja]

While I wouldn't call Haitink "boring", I don't see anything wrong in acknowledging the fact that his approach had become rather old-fashioned. Which, for a conductor standing in the tradition of Mengelberg and Van Beinum, and raised while Karajan was king, isn't all that strange. Let's not forget that the KCO was expressly brought into the world to focus on a flawless reproduction of the "greats". And I think in that sense, he was the perfect conductor for the KCO. There is a lot to love: I witnessed a phenomenal Mahler 8th (the only time I've really liked that work), there's a stellar Alpensymphonie, and he left behind a very good set of Bruckners.

The flip side is that this focus, and Haitink's eye for detail, could go at the expense of spontaneity; and he sometimes found it difficult to handle music outside of the (for the KCO) standard Austro-German fare. His Shostakovich 13 on Philips is a case in point: there's nothing technically wrong with it, but at no point do you feel the pain that Yevtushenko's poem and Shostakovich's symphony sought to convey: it's all just a bit too smooth. Also, a "light" approach wasn't really his thing: his Beethoven, for instance, can be rather on the heavy side. But the biggest issue of his recorded legacy, perhaps, is that his style was never particularly distinctive; you won't find a whole lot of Haitink recordings in people's Desert Island Disc set, I think.

Having said that, and perhaps because of this relative lack of profile, he was a fantastic operatic conductor, and I feel that once in London - and liberated of that Concertgebouw legacy - he did his best work.

[Mark Thomas]

I must say that I agree with Ilja's sentiments, and I don't think they take anything away from a properly glowing appreciation of the man and his music making. I've treasured my old Philips CD set of him conducting the Concertgebuow in the Brahms symphonies, and for me it's still the gold standard, but over the years I've also supplemented it with readings from conductors who have offered less perfect overall but, perhaps, more intermittently exciting or revelatory performances.

[Alan Howe]

Haitink stood in the unfussy tradition of van Beinum - far removed from the idiosyncratic and wilful Mengelberg. He was very different from Karajan in his utter lack of interest in 'image' (I'm a huge HvK fan, btw).

I'm not sure that it's correct to call his approach 'old-fashioned'. In respect of the classics I'd call it 'central' - and in his later years he was even open to conducting a chamber orchestra in Beethoven. Try this for real fizz (especially in the finale):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFbjDP_qKYY

And for once I totally agree with David Hurwitz: his Bizet Symphony in C is just the best ever. Never heard it?>>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xk7TVPyboY

No-one's perfect, of course. In Mahler I prefer a more 'dynamic' approach, but in Bruckner he could be sublime. His late VPO 7th is one for the ages.

[Ilja]

That Bizet, to me, supports what I tried to say: that while Haitink is always solid, he's rarely that distinctive. It's a fine reading, but in spite of what Hurwitz might say I wouldn't call it exceptional (and when pressed I'd say that the adagio is taken too slowly, as well).


When I'm speaking of the KCO tradition, I'm not so much referring to interpretation but primarily to a certain kind of repertoire, combined with an emphasis on the craft of musicianship. By the way, Haitink's reputation wasn't quite as "unfussy" as Van Beinum's - he could be quite temperamental.

[Alan Howe]

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm not sure that Haitink strove to be 'distinctive' so much as 'faithful'. As regards van Beinum, I'm thinking of the recordings I have of him which are 'straightforward' in the best sense of the word.

Anyway, let's leave it at that.